Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS Sklep X DoR 130/2021-3 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:X.DOR.130.2021.3 AI generated

Supreme Court allows review regarding whether new facts rule applies to elaborating initial claims.

Case Number VSRS Sklep X DoR 130/2021-3
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia permitted a review of the administrative court's decision on specific legal grounds. The applicant argued that the prohibition on introducing new facts under Article 479 of the Financial Market Act also restricts the elaboration of claims already made in the objection. The court determined that the conditions for admitting the review under the Administrative Procedure Act were met for this precise question.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 479 of the Financial Market Act; Article 367.a(1) of the Act on Legal Procedure; The prohibition on introducing new facts applies to the elaboration of claims already stated in the objection.

Keywords

AI generated
new facts prohibition financial market act administrative procedure act review admissibility claim elaboration

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 479 of the Financial Market Act
Article 367.a(1) of the Act on Legal Procedure
Article 22(1) of the Act on Administrative Disputes
AI generated
Sodba in sklep G 9/2000
Court dismisses lawsuit against securities regulator's order and cost ruling due to procedural errors and lack of standing.
VSRS Sklep V DoR 3/2024
Supreme Court allows review regarding violation of plaintiffs' right to be heard and lack of adversarial proceedings.
Sodba G 1/2009
Supreme Court dismisses administrative lawsuit against share acquisition, ruling coordinated action proven by facts.
VSRS Sklep V DoR 4/2025-6
Supreme Court dismisses appeal request for inadmissibility due to missing signature under Civil Procedure Act rules.
Sklep G 7/2008
Supreme Court dismisses request for temporary order allowing voting rights despite administrative ban on coordinated takeover.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja: Ali se prepoved navajanja novih dejstev iz 479. člena ZTFI-1 nanaša tudi na konkretizacijo in dodatno elaboriranje trditev, postavljenih že v ugovoru?

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali se prepoved navajanja novih dejstev iz 479. člena ZTFI-1 nanaša tudi na konkretizacijo in dodatno elaboriranje trditev, postavljenih že v ugovoru.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Upravno sodišče je zavrnilo tožbo zoper odločbo Agencije za trg vrednostnih papirjev št. 0605-1/2018-38 z dne 13. 2. 2020 in odločilo, da vsaka stranka trpi svoje stroške postopka.

2. Zoper sodbo Upravnega sodišča vlaga tožeča stranka predlog za dopustitev revizije.

3. Vrhovno sodišče ugotavlja, da so izpolnjeni pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (ZPP), v zvezi s prvim odstavkom 22. člena Zakona o upravnem sporu, glede vprašanja, opredeljenega v izreku sklepa. Revizijo je zato v tem obsegu dopustilo.

4. Sklep je bil sprejet soglasno (sedmi odstavek 324. člena ZPP).